Usman Son Of Baddal @ Noor Mohammad vs State Of Rajasthan
2023 Latest Caselaw 2859 Raj/2

       HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
                   BENCH AT JAIPUR

     S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 950/2023

1.      Usman Son Of Baddal @ Noor Mohammad, Resident Of
        Village   Baded,       P.s.   Punhana,        District   Nooh,    Mewat
        Haryana
2.      Kashmir Son Of [email protected] Kenda, Resident Of Village Baded,
        P.s. Punhana, District Nooh, Mewat Haryana
3.      Sameem @ Lakkhi Son Of Kabir @ Kenda, Resident Of
        Village   Baded,       P.s.   Punhana,        District   Nooh,    Mewat
        Haryana
4.      Hakam Son Of Kabir @ Kenda, Resident Of Village Baded,
        P.s. Punhana, District Nooh, Mewat Haryana
                                                                  ----Petitioners
                                      Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.
                                                                 ----Respondent

Connected With S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 951/2023 Ahamed Son Of Baseer, R/o Village Dathet, Police Station Pahari, District Bharatpur ( Rajasthan)

----Petitioner Versus State Of Rajasthan, Through P.p.

                                                                 ----Respondent


For Petitioner(s)          :    None Present
For Respondent(s)          :    Mr. Sher Singh Mahla, PP

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

14/03/2023

1. No one appears on behalf of the petitioners.

(2 of 3) [CRLMB-950/2023]

2. Learned lawyers are not attending/co-operating with the

Court in judicial proceedings since last more than three weeks,

though, they have no grievance against the Court Administration.

3. The Apex Court in the judgment of Harish Uppal Vs. Union

Of India & Anr. reported in (2003) 2 SCC 45 observed that

non-cooperation in judicial proceeding is not only punitive one,

rather the Court is empowered to proceed in the listed judicial

matters according to the law even in the absence of the parties

and/or their Advocates.

4. Defect is overruled in S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail

Application No. 951/2023.

5. The present bail applications have been filed by the

petitioners under Section 438 Cr. P.C. in connection with FIR

No.368/2021 registered at Police Station Pahadi, District

Bharatpur for the offence under Sections 54/60 of R.M.M.C.R. Act,

2017, Sections 4 /21 of R.M.M.D.R. Act, 1957, Section 379 IPC

and Sections 4 & 5 of Explosive Act, 1907.

6. Petitioners in their pleadings mentioned that they have been

falsely implicated in this case due to political rivalry. Nothing has

been recovered from the petitioners. Petitioners were not engaged

in illegal mining. So, the petitioners be enlarged on anticipatory

bail.

7. Learned Public Prosecutor has opposed the bail application

and submitted that the petitioners were engaged in illegal mining

and explosive material was also recovered on the spot. So, the

bail application filed by the petitioners be dismissed.

8. I have considered the pleadings of the petitioners as well as

arguments advanced by learned Public Prosecutor.

(3 of 3) [CRLMB-950/2023]

9. Petitioners were engaged in the illegal mining. They are

destroying the ecological balance of the environment. Custodial

interrogation of the petitioners is also required. So, I do not

consider it a fit case to enlarge the petitioners on anticipatory bail.

10. Hence, the criminal misc. bail application stands dismissed.

11. A copy of this order be placed in connected file.

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

Gourav/43-44

Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)